California Carbon Capture Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863894283
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Local Benevolent Life Insurance Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$525,296
Expenses
$865,526
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Alexandre Makler (Pres. & Chair)
  • Keith Pronske (V. Chair/Dir)
  • Henry Perea (Secretary & Dir)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration ("CCUS") opportunities in California, including but not limited to, direct air capture. The Coalition seeks to educate legislators, regulators, and other state officials on the benefits of CCUS and to promote the application of CCUS technology as a means for California to achieve its decarbonizing goals.

What it reported doing in 2022

Promoted carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration ("CCUS") opportunities in California, including but not limited to, direct air capture. The Coalition sought to educate legislators, regulators, and other state officials on the benefits of CCUS and to promote the application of CCUS technology as a means for California to achieve its decarbonizing goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -64.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 157.3% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $779K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $702K reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2021 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.